The League of Nations
The International Agriculture Department
•
THE ECONOMIC CONFERENCE.
Hrrnmero questions of commercial policy have been the main preoccupation of the Consultative Committee, which is the body responsible for putting into practice the recommenda- tions of the World Economic Conference. In this Geneva has continued to receive valuable help from the International Chamber of Commerce. But obviously the subjects covered by subsequent meetings of the Economic Committee (the Conference in miniature)—treaty-making methods, the scope and implications of the most-favoured nation clause, import and export prohibitions and restrictions, unification of customs nomenclature, of national legislation with regard to bills of exchange, promissory notes and cheques, &c., do not exhaust the work that an international body can—and must—do. In regard to specific industrial and agricultural questions, the Economic Organization was merely instructed to keep in touch with the institutions specially concerned—namely, the International Labour Office together with the International Scientific Management Institute, both of them within easy reach of the Secretariat at Geneva, and the International Institute of Agriculture in Rome. Since 1908, the year in which this pioneer international organization began working —although it was actually founded by an international con- vention of 1905—the Institute has been an instrument ready to hand for dealing with the economies of agricultural pro. duction and distribution, and its task has been precisely that which is only now being faced by the representatives of industry—namely, international action in the common interest. The men who assembled at Geneva to co-ordinate the economic activities of the world recognized the invaluable service that was already being rendered by the Institute in Rome. But their Resolution indicating the tasks of the future was also a warning against overlapping of functions. If we consider what is the actual range and extent of the Institute's work, we shall the better appreciate certain difficulties which have arisen during the last twelve months.
THE ROLE OF THE INSTITUTE.
'The object of the work of the Institute is self-evident—to defend and promote the agricultural interests of the entire world by means of discussion and investigation on all questions of agricultural production and progress. It is not, however, simply and solely a fact-finding organization. It does not merely serve to co-ordinate the activities of farmers all over the world and ensure a common fund of knowledge by which any nation or any individual agriculturist may profit. What is perhaps more important to the student of international affairs is that the Institute is also a Government institution in which every State is represented by delegates of its own choice, and that the biennial General Assembly of the Institute was, until May, 1927, the: only occasion on which Government representatives met on common ground as units of a world economic whole.
What distinguishes this inter-State body from the ordinary grouping, due to private initiative, is the fact that the members of the Governing Body proper, the General Assembly, together with its executive organ, the Permanent Committee, have other besides representative or purely administrative functions. By the terms of the Convention (Article 9) they are called upon to act as an advisory council with powers of initiative in the field of international agreements affecting agricultural interests. That this Article remained a dead letter practically speaking, before 1914, was perhaps very natural when we reflect that there was little or no conception of an organized world society such as exists in embryo at Geneva to-day. The best friends of the Institute were always disposed rather to congratulate themselves on its capacity for quiet and unobtrusive achievement. Since the War, too, they seem to have concentrated their energies on keeping the work of the Institute outside politics, taking cover behind a clause in the constitution which reads that " all questions affecting the economic interests, the legislation or the adminis- tration of any particular State are outside the competence of the Institute." In the early difficult days, such caution may have been necessary and even praiseworthy, but now that an international economic structure is no longer mere fantisv. it is for the Institute to link up more and more with' Geneva; and so to approximate to that " powerful organ of peace," which was the dearest wish of the founder.
The Institute is singularly fortunate in having at its head now a man of wide experience in business and administration, Signor de Michelis, the President, has a shrewd conception of the part which the Institute is destined to play in building up the new economic order in Europe. His experience as Director of the Italian Commissariat of Emigration and his role as a member of the Governing Body of the International Labour Organization keep him in constant touch with the main features in international relations and ensures an appre- ciation of the practical value of the Institute by the outside 'world. When he took office in 1925 he defined the funda- mental basis on which the Institute must be reorganized and developed so as to fulfil its higher and post-War functions. At the previous biennial Assembly he had pleaded for :- (1) A strengthening of the internal organization of the Institute.
(2) Widespread publicity for its work and aspirations.
(3) Close contact with the living forces of agriculture and the international economic movement.
We shall see that during the four years (approximately) in which he has been at the head of affairs the Institute has pro- gressed considerably on these lines. Signor de Michelis, how- ever, like most men of personality and character, is something of an autocrat. His methods do not commend themselves to certain delegates on the Permanent Committee, who point out, with some show of reason, that the election of a member of the Permanent Committee, by custom the delegate of Italy, to the Presidency of the Institute does not confer on him executive functions not vested in the Committee itself. The complaint of the American delegation which leads the oppo- sition is that the Institute is not internationally controlled as it should be, and that it is much influenced by Italian interests. For these reasons Prof. Asher Hobson, the American dele- gate, ceased to give active support to the Institute as from last January (1928) and moved to Geneva where he has established an office of his own. It is not likely, however, that the attitude of the U.S. representative will lead to America's withdrawal from this as from the League organizar tion. What it does mean is that the question of co-operation between the League and the Institute can be delayed no longer. And, in fact, the Italian Government has already taken the initiative in laying before the League Council a pro- visional scheme which, whatever its other merits or defects, does at least obviate the necessity of States not members of the League withdrawing from membership of the Institute.
ITS WORK.
Internal organization is in the hands of the General Secre- tary, who is also Secretary of the Permanent Committee. It comprises at present a General Secretariat responsible for the details of administration and including the Library 'and a Section of Agricultural Legislation, a Bureau of General Statistics, a Bureau of Agricultural Science, and a Bureau of Economic and Social Intelligence. Of these activities crop- reporting, in the eyes of the sponsors of the Institute, was to be far and away the most important and was developed accordingly to a very high pitch of efficiency. An objective report of the state of crops in the various countries all over the world is supplied by the Bureau of General Statistics: The magnum opus of the Statistical Bureau still remains to be mentioned. In a small bungalow-like building which serves as an annexe—not a hundred yards from the Institute-7a special staff has been detailed for the planning and arrange- ment of a World Agricultural Census for 1930-31. Draft schedules for this monumental work have already been prepared. The names of the other sections are sufficient testimony to the value of the Institute as a centre of studies. Like the new Institute in Paris, of which Prof. Zimmern has written in the Spectator, this doyen of international institutions must be considered in function, if not in fact, as a section of the Geneva Secretariat. Its 71 adherent States account for 94 • • I .• • .. ner_ cent. of the world's population.
Previous page
